쇠鹬 쇠지鹬 3000 쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지지지지지지 3000

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지지지 3000 지지지지지지지지지지 3000

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 31, 199, the Plaintiff passed a resolution to use 6,353.5 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in profit-making business for four parcels, including the land owned at the temporary representative meeting of Representatives, AAAB BB at the time of AAB-dong 55,CC (hereinafter “AB-dong”).

B. On August 23, 199, the Plaintiff agreed to jointly implement the construction of multi-family housing and neighborhood living facilities on the said land by setting the price of the instant land at KRW 2,500,000 on a flat basis between DD and DDD Co., Ltd.

C. On December 29, 200, the Plaintiff terminated the above agreement with the DD Co., Ltd. and entered into a joint project implementation agreement with the EE Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the EE Co., Ltd.) with the following contents to construct apartment units 168 households and ancillary welfare facilities on the instant land (hereinafter referred to as the "joint project agreement of this case" and the "project of this case").

1. Construction name: New construction work of apartment lots, No. 555, Jeju-dong;

2. Construction site: The construction site: At least three parcels, 55, 55, CC-dong, Gyeonggi-do;

3. 공사규모 : 아파트 168서|대 및 부대 복리시설(지하 1층, 지상 25충)(01하 생략)

4. Period: 26 months from the date of commencement.

5. Project operator: plaintiffs and EE;

6. The amount of shares in the project and the amount guaranteed by land;

- The plaintiff: Guarantee of at least 2,500,000 won per land size;

- Under the responsibility of the implementing Party, the Plaintiff and EEE may determine and subcontract the FF FF 1 unit with a view to the parcelling-out nature. EE and the contractor shall bear all business income tax, corporate tax, except land costs, construction costs, and project costs out of apartment sales proceeds.

- All remaining revenues except project costs and taxes and public charges shall be the plaintiff's revenue.

Article 2 of the Terms and Conditions for Implementation of Joint Project (Principles of Implementation of Projects)

1. A shall, as the landowner and executor of the new apartment construction work, implement the matters falling under each of the following subparagraphs:

(i) securing all the ownership of the land in connection with the project (including release of restrictions);

2) Global income tax imposed in the name of the Plaintiff (design, supervision, contribution)

2. EE is a co-implementer of a new main apartment construction project and is responsible for the following matters:

section 3.

1) Construction of apartment buildings and ancillary facilities in accordance with design documents (which shall be jointly and severally liable with the subcontractor).

(ii) global income tax, corporate tax and various contributions, excluding land rents;

(iii) corporate tax burden imposed in the name of EE;

3. The cost of the project shall be borne by the plaintiff (the replacement);

Article 4 (Business Period)

1. The period for construction shall be 26 months after the commencement thereof;

2. The settlement of accounts of business shall be made occasionally by the plaintiff, if necessary, and shall be completed within three months after completion;

Article 5 (Liability for Repair of Defects) It shall be borne by the execution businessman.

Article 6 (Management of Sales-Related Business and Revenues from Sale)

1. All the affairs related to the sale of the project shall be conducted by the plaintiff or the person designated by the plaintiff, and the EE shall actively cooperate with the plaintiff.

2. The opening of an account for receipt of sales proceeds shall be managed by the plaintiff after being opened in the sole name of the plaintiff.

3.The withdrawal of proceeds from sale shall be in the following order:

- Project costs, construction costs, service costs, and land payments;

4. 원고와 EEEE은 위 계좌에 대하여 어느 일방이 지급정지, 압류 등 자금인출에 방해되는 행위를 일체 할 수 없으며 일밤의 사유로 인하여 분양금 인출에 방해가 ‰瑛�경우 손해로 인한 20%에 해당하는 이자를 상대방에게 지급하여야 하며, 민, 형사상 책임을 진다. (이하 생략)

D. On October 2001, the Plaintiff entered into a joint agreement with EE and GGGGG Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “GGGG”) with the same content as the instant joint agreement, and carried out apartment construction projects.

E. After January 28, 2003, the Plaintiff, EE, and GGGG contractor was a contractor, and HHHHHHHHHH corporation entered into a contract for the alteration of the JJJK LMM and completed the construction of an apartment on January 16, 2004.

F. On January 28, 2003, the Plaintiff, EEE, and GGG agreed to pay 2.5 million won per square meter of the Plaintiff’s land cost, a total of 4.8 billion won and KRW 4.75 billion to the Plaintiff as sales revenue until the completion of the said apartment construction project.

G. On June 10, 2007, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff entered into the instant joint project agreement with EE and transferred the instant land by investing in kind in the instant business on December 29, 2000; and (b) rendered the instant disposition imposing capital gains tax of KRW 1,558,973,720 on the Plaintiff for the year 200.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 10, Eul 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff’s sale of the instant land to EE is not a joint implementation of EE and the instant project, and the time of the Plaintiff’s transfer of the instant land should be December 14, 2005, which was paid by the Plaintiff. Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) As to the reason for the transfer of the instant land

In full view of the statements in Gap evidence and Eul evidence Nos. 9, 3, and 5, the plaintiff was involved in the project of this case as a co-implementer of the project of this case, such as securing the right to the land of this case, and managing the sales revenue account for the project of this case. After the completion of the project of this case, the plaintiff was allocated 4,804,750,000 won as the land purchase cost of this case, and EE was allocated 1,416,25,000 won as the development related cost. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the plaintiff did not simply sell the land of this case to EE EE which is the joint purpose of constructing apartment houses with EE, but rather, formed an association relation for the joint purpose of constructing apartment houses. Further, since the land of this case was invested in kind in the project of this case, the plaintiff's assertion that the land of this case was transferred through the sale of the land of this case is without merit.

2) Time of transfer of the instant land

As long as the transfer of an investment in kind to a union is deemed as the transfer of an asset at a cost, it is reasonable to regard the time of the transfer as the time of the investment in kind to the union (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 85Nu339, Nov. 12, 1985), and the fact that the Plaintiff entered into a joint agreement with EE on Nov. 29, 200 and made an investment in kind in the instant land as seen earlier (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 85Nu39, Nov. 2, 2005). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s joint agreement with EE and OO around Oct. 29, 201 is identical to the above fact that the Plaintiff entered into a joint agreement with EE andOO. However, in light of the evidence evidence No. 5, it is reasonable to regard it to add the EE to OO as the joint project executor for the issuance of a sale guarantee certificate, and thus, the Plaintiff’s actual relation between the Plaintiff, 2014.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.